An international study led by the Kyoto University, Hokkaido University, and IIASA reveals that the total elimination of fossil fuels by 2050 would require between 60% and 80% more electricity generation compared to conventional 1.5 °C scenarios.
This increase responds to the need to electrify hard-to-decarbonize sectors and massively deploy energy carriers like hydrogen, ammonia, and synthetic fuels.
Political and Climate Context
The debate intensified after the COP28 in Dubai (2023), where governments agreed to phase out fossil fuels in energy systems.
Subsequently, the COP30 in Belém (Brazil) and the Santa Marta Conference delved into how to implement this transition. The initiative “Transition to Phase Out Fossil Fuels” seeks to accelerate the elimination of coal, oil, and gas.
Differences Between Decarbonization and Total Elimination
The lead author, Shotaro Mori, explains that decarbonizing and eliminating fossils are not the same:
- Decarbonization can maintain limited fossil use with carbon capture.
- Total elimination requires rapid electrification, green hydrogen, and profound changes in consumption and demand.
Models Used
The researchers compared trajectories with two recognized models:
- AIM-Technology (Asia-Pacific).
- MESSAGEix-GLOBIOM (global biosphere management).
Fossil-free scenarios required:
- 1.6 to 1.8 times more electricity by 2050.
- Accelerated expansion of solar and wind.
- Rapid deployment of electrolyzers.
- Much higher accumulated investments.
- Profound changes in consumption patterns.
Benefits of Total Elimination
- Substantial reduction of residual CO₂ emissions.
- Less reliance on carbon capture and storage technologies (CCS, BECCS, DACCS).
- Higher probability of returning to 1.5 °C after temporary overheating.
Volker Krey from IIASA emphasizes that it is not just about replacing energy sources, but a profound restructuring of energy systems, industrial processes, and infrastructures.
Equity and Just Transition
The study warns that total elimination must consider:
- Just transition for countries dependent on fossil production and export.
- International cooperation and complementary policies.
- Support for affected regions and workers.
Costs and Risks
Strategies that maintain limited fossil use with carbon capture may be more cost-effective in the short term. However, total defossilization serves as a safeguard against climate uncertainty by designing an energy system with lower structural risk.
The total elimination of fossil fuels by 2050 is technically possible but requires a rapid deployment of renewable energies, hydrogen, and massive electrification. Although it involves high costs and equity challenges, it offers decisive environmental benefits and reduces dependence on carbon capture technologies.
The study becomes a key reference for ongoing international debates and for the next generation of climate strategies that will define the planet’s energy future.
